Tragic yet worrying scenes in waterford last night

Nino Brown

Dermot Illogical wrote: »

Everything's under control lads, forensics have arrived.

We can't trust forensics, sure they're in on the conspiracy

RecordStraight

Dermot Illogical wrote: »

Everything's under control lads, forensics have arrived.

Yeah, CSI Dungarvan are on the scene. "Your honour, the defence contends that - due to his remarkable elastic arms - the defendant was able to smack the officer on the BACK of his head from a position in front of him. You will note that his arm bends in two places."

Santa Cruz

thirdtime wrote: »

haha!! So true!

do knackers not realise the impact a neck tattoo has on their employment prospects?

I'm sure it has been mentioned in his many attempts at finding work.

lighterman

well on a lighter note ive never had more than 5 posts in a thread I've started never mind 500

mrsbyrne

lighterman wrote: »

well on a lighter note ive never had more than 5 posts in a thread I've started never mind 500

Well done lighter man its certainly been yet another eye opener for me! Talk about your delusions !

Brown Bomber

RecordStraight wrote: »

I'm going to sit that possibility right beside the Hitler/anorexic Jew argument, and of course the possibility that the Garda ran backwards at the group flailing his arms behind him. Unless the guy has two elbows in his arm, that bottle is going to hit the Garda on the TOP of the head. Do we know if he has two elbows?

I know you are hiding behind a second account but is there any possibility of you discussing this honestly?

If the girl in this picture had been drinking beer from a bottle in her left hand at the time of the attack and she swung her arm back over her shoulder she would have cracked him in the back of the head. Therefore, impossible? No.
http://i1.ytimg.com/vi/7XI1uAdr_s4/maxresdefault.jpg

Nino Brown

Brown Bomber wrote: »

I know you are hiding behind a second account but is there any possibility of you discussing this honestly?

If the girl in this picture had been drinking beer from a bottle in her left hand at the time of the attack and she swung her arm back over her shoulder she would have cracked him in the back of the head. Therefore, impossible? No.
http://i1.ytimg.com/vi/7XI1uAdr_s4/maxresdefault.jpg

You've never heard of Occam's Razor have you?

RecordStraight

Brown Bomber wrote: »

I know you are hiding behind a second account but is there any possibility of you discussing this honestly?

If the girl in this picture had been drinking beer from a bottle in her left hand at the time of the attack and she swung her arm back over her shoulder she would have cracked him in the back of the head. Therefore, impossible? No.

Are we looking at the same picture here? Oh, wait, you mean the one where the guy is bending over as well? Sure why not pile one more implausible hypothetical onto the pile?

I can see why you are such a fan of conspiracy theories - odds and likelihoods clearly have no meaning for you.

mercfisher

This is typical, we are becoming a nanny state, worse than that even, four people armed with bottles attack a mans house in the middle of the night, then attack him and seriously assault him , quite literally he could have been killed with a belt over the head from a bottle, if it was known or not that he was a Guard is irrelevant, the three left should be given lengthy jail terms 7 to 10 years, instead of that we have to use the police ombudsman to make sure the assaulted guard behaved properly. god help us !

digzy

thirdtime wrote: »

haha!! So true!

do knackers not realise the impact a neck tattoo has on their employment prospects?

I don't think "employment prospects " are too high on their list of priorities!!

Brown Bomber

Nino Brown wrote: »

You've never heard of Occam's Razor have you?

Yes, I have and unlike you I actually know how to use it.

By fault or design you are misusing Occam's razor here. It is not a substitute for evidence as you are trying to use it. Your hypothesis is invalid without any evidence; you haven't presented any evidence whatsoever. To apply Occam's razor your hypothesis needs to be valid from the outset. Your hypothesis is not. Your abuse of Occam's razor amounts to a cop-out.

In fact, you haven't even provided a hypothesis; nevermind provide any evidence.

Irrespective of all this you and our mutual friend who is hiding behind a second boards username are twisting what I have said. In line with Sherlock Holmes' maxim I agree that anything impossible should be excluded. The policeman being the aggressor and getting hit in the back of the head is not impossible and should not be excluded on this basis. That is all I am saying.

Brown Bomber

digzy wrote: »

Is it possible for brown bomber to get a ban for posting absolute rubbish?

Point out the absolute rubbish and I will explain to you why you are wrong.

digzy wrote: »

Let's a. Pitch in for a second hand shell suit-preferably in white, an earing and a neck tattoo:pac:

You do realise you are publically insulting a man who has never done you any harm who has just lost his teenage son in a tragic accident?

Can you explain the mentality of someone who does this?

Brown Bomber

mercfisher wrote: »

This is typical, we are becoming a nanny state, worse than that even, four people armed with bottles attack a mans house in the middle of the night, then attack him and seriously assault him , quite literally he could have been killed with a belt over the head from a bottle, if it was known or not that he was a Guard is irrelevant, the three left should be given lengthy jail terms 7 to 10 years, instead of that we have to use the police ombudsman to make sure the assaulted guard behaved properly. god help us !

You want people to be jailed longer for breaking bottles than child abusers?

niamh.foley

Sorry if i come off Wrong here, but i find this abit insulting to the general public, my house got broken into before and it took them over 1 hour to get to my house, even tho they are about 10 min drive from where i live.

This person gets a man hunt with the coastguard helicopter and a major search party. what did i get 2 garda members calling to my door asking questions and had to wait till the next day for some senior garda to come to take finger prints

pablo128

Brown Bomber wrote: »

Point out the absolute rubbish and I will explain to you why you are wrong.


You do realise you are publically insulting a man who has never done you any harm who has just lost his teenage son in a tragic accident?

Can you explain the mentality of someone who does this?

And you are accusing a senior garda of running after a gang, trying to choke one of them out, and then bizarrely claiming the lad acrobatically smashed a bottle of the back of said gardas head. Without a shred of evidence.

Can you explain the mentality of someone who does this?

lighterman

niamh.foley wrote: »

Sorry if i come off Wrong here, but i find this abit insulting to the general public, my house got broken into before and it took them over 1 hour to get to my house, even tho they are about 10 min drive from where i live.

This person gets a man hunt with the coastguard helicopter and a major search party. what did i get 2 garda members calling to my door asking questions and had to wait till the next day for some senior garda to come to take finger prints

I can assure you no senior Garda called to your house to take finger prints. They were a sergeant at most.

Brown Bomber

RecordStraight wrote: »

Are we looking at the same picture here? Oh, wait, you mean the one where the guy is bending over as well? Sure why not pile one more implausible hypothetical onto the pile?

I can see why you are such a fan of conspiracy theories - odds and likelihoods clearly have no meaning for you.

This is not Paddy Power. The investigation will establish the facts. We don't have the facts yet. You have completely turned everything on it's head. I am not defending anti-social behaviour. I am saying that anti-social behaviour does not justify death. To take pleasure in the death of a stranger is sick. It appears that this pleasure is not based on him supposedly causing a disturbance but what he symbolises, at least in the small-minded black and white world where "we" are good and "they" are not even worthy of life.

Brown Bomber

pablo128 wrote: »

And you are accusing a senior garda of running after a gang, trying to choke one of them out, and then bizarrely claiming the lad acrobatically smashed a bottle of the back of said gardas head. Without a shred of evidence.

Can you explain the mentality of someone who does this?

No, because I haven't done this.

thirdtime

This forum has gone on too long

DubVelo

Smashing a bottle over someone's head is not 'self defense'!
Bloody hell... :rolleyes:

rm234

Brown Bomber wrote: »

No, that is your 100th strawman of the day. There are a multitude of events which could have lead to the guard being the attacker and still getting hit in the back of the head.

Also, the injury is more consistent with self-defense than an assault with intention to cause maximum harm,. They could have continued to batter him after they took him out with the bottle - they didn't - or at least there is no indication of yhis so far .
Like I said, I don't know what happened in this time. If you do, and can support it with actual solid and verifiable evidence, then share it.

Ireland is small, plenty of people from Dungarvan use boards, use the two brain cells you have. If you live in ballyconspiracytheorymilebridge then stfu and let people who actually know their shít give useful information rather than troll.

Shady Tady

niamh.foley wrote: »

Sorry if i come off Wrong here, but i find this abit insulting to the general public, my house got broken into before and it took them over 1 hour to get to my house, even tho they are about 10 min drive from where i live.

This person gets a man hunt with the coastguard helicopter and a major search party. what did i get 2 garda members calling to my door asking questions and had to wait till the next day for some senior garda to come to take finger prints

Was there anyone dead in your drain?

Brown Bomber

DubVelo wrote: »

Smashing a bottle over someone's head is not 'self defense'!
Bloody hell... :rolleyes:

Really?
Man accused of throwing bottle cleared of assault


http://www.newsandstar.co.uk/news/man-accused-of-throwing-bottle-cleared-of-assault-1.1130293

extracheese

From what I have read, this was a tragic accident caused by a series of bad choices made by this young man. A lot of people are making excuses for his behaviour while others seem to be condoning his death. Perhaps, this young man has always had people around him that were always quick to make excuses for his behaviour. And as such, never learned that all choices have consequences, whether good, bad or indifferent. I do think that as a society we need to teach young people that their decisions and choices have consequences and that they themselves need to take responsibility for those choices. People need to stop mollycoddling young people and making excuses for their behaviour. The man was 18, in the eyes of the law old enough to be accountable for his actions. And unless he was living under a rock for the past 18 years, knows what is and what isn't appropriate.

He chose to scale a seven foot fence and jump over it in the middle of the night without knowing what was on the other side, he chose to run away from the Gardaí, he chose to go out with his friends that night, and he chose to remain with his friends when the bottles were thrown. I can't imagine that anyone on God's green earth made him do these things, he, himself made these decisions. His decisions caused his death.

Also, there are literally thousands of eighteen year olds in this country. On that night, how many other eighteen year olds were out causing trouble? Of the thousands of eighteen year olds, how many of them would actually CHOOSE to engage in this sort of behaviour? If I were to hazard a guess, probably less then 2%. Most eighteen year olds go out drinking, they will on occasion have far too much to drink, they may be a bit too loud walking home from the pub or wherever, they may vomit or urinate in an inappropriate place, they may get into an argument, they may leave rubbish lying on the ground, they may....none of these behaviours are very appropriate but they are not criminal. The vast majority of young people would not hit a garda over the head with a bottle, nor do they have friends that would. Please stop making excuses for the 2% that choose to engage in criminal behaviour.

Brown Bomber

rm234 wrote: »

Ireland is small, plenty of people from Dungarvan use boards, use the two brain cells you have. If you live in ballyconspiracytheorymilebridge then stfu and let people who actually know their shít give useful information rather than troll.

If I could just make myself clear. I am not suggesting any conspiracy theory, if I was I would be talking about the police force acting like a militia and carrying out revenge attacks and killing anyone who attacks them - such as in Waco, the killing of Dormer and in Brazil recently where an off duty policeman was killed in a bank robbery and the police went out on a four hour killing spree which killed 14 people.

What I am doing here is the opposite to a "conspiracy theory", it is reserving judgement and not speculating until the facts are known.

I've been hit by a bottle, I have sympathy for the policeman, though I think his decision making process might have been influenced by his emotions. I have sympathy for the community. I lived for years beside a pub that would fill up (and then out) with the kinds of people like Ducey and his friends. I am no stranger to drunk and disorderly behaviour.

My only issues were the hatred and prejudices oozing out from people in the sadistic joy they feel in the death in a tragic accident of a young Irish student whose life was just as valuable as anyone else¨s here.

This repulsive and prejudiced schadenfreude is something that is alien to me, completely incomprehensible. So much so that I actually made an attempt to understand it. I can share the studies here if anyone else is interested.

Stereotypes and Schadenfreude

Affective and Physiological Markers of Pleasure at Outgroup Misfortunes

http://spp.sagepub.com/content/3/1/63.abstract

Us and Them

Intergroup Failures of Empathy


http://web.mit.edu/~ebruneau/www/Emile_Bruneau_Professional_Site/Publications_files/CikaraBruneau2011CDPS.pdf

Us Versus Them

Social Identity Shapes Neural Responses to Intergroup Competition and Harm

http://pss.sagepub.com/content/22/3/306.abstract

Brown Bomber

extracheese wrote: »

. Most eighteen year olds go out drinking, they will on occasion have far too much to drink, they may be a bit too loud walking home from the pub or wherever, they may vomit or urinate in an inappropriate place, they may get into an argument, they may leave rubbish lying on the ground, they may....none of these behaviours are very appropriate but they are not criminal. .

I'll just preface this by saying I agreed with virtually everything you've said. However, most, if not all of the above are technically criminal. The unanswered question is how far removed Ducey and his friends behaviour was to these kinds of other "innapropriate behaviour".

Shady Tady

Brown Bomber wrote: »

I'll just preface this by saying I agreed with virtually everything you've said. However, most, if not all of the above are technically criminal. The unanswered question is how far removed Ducey and his friends behaviour was to these kinds of other "innapropriate behaviour".

Very far removed thank god, most 18 year olds are decent, enjoy themselves without bringing crime to the doors of others and most of them make it home safely as a result!

extracheese

Yes, you are correct in saying that most of these things are technically criminal and there are fines and sanctions for such behaviour. I do not like the Schadenfreude mentality displayed by people. I do think much of the Schadenfreude is a reflection of people's own personal struggles and frustrations. How many people out there are struggling to keep a roof over their heads, pay the bills, find a job, keep their own children on the straight and narrow? Living in housing estates where this is a common occurrence? It does not excuse the Schadenfreude, simply rejoicing in this man's death does not solve any problems. Schaden=tragedy, freude=joy, there is no joy to be gained from this tragedy, no one has won or gained anything, and sadly, this man's death will change nothing.

Dan_Solo

Brown Bomber wrote: »

You want people to be jailed longer for breaking bottles than child abusers?

No, I think we all want child abusers to be jailed for longer.
Though I wonder how many people here would advocate 7-10 year sentences for assault with a police baton, which is far more dangeous than getting hit with a bottle.

Shady Tady

Dan_Solo wrote: »

No, I think we all want child abusers to be jailed for longer.
Though I wonder how many people here would advocate 7-10 year sentences for assault with a police baton, which is far more dangeous than getting hit with a bottle.

I think maybe a bonus payment for the police officer would be more appropriate when dealing with thugs!'